A lawsuit that alleges excessive search procedures by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers has civil- and immigration-rights activists demanding answers and changes.

The questions at the heart of the issue are what rights do people have at ports of entry, what powers do agents have and when and where do parts of the Fourth Amendment, which protects people from unlaw searches and seizures, stop applying.

U.S. Rep. Beto O'Rourke, D-El Paso, has asked for an investigation into the latest incident in which a New Mexico woman claims in a lawsuit that she was forced to have a cavity search, which included anal and vaginal probes.

O'Rourke said the war on drugs should not be used as an excuse to violate anybody's constitutional rights.

"Recent allegations brought against CBP for extreme and illegal searches are deeply troubling and, if true, completely unacceptable," O'Rourke said. "Individuals do not waive their Constitutional or human rights simply because they choose to cross one of our international bridges. The war on drugs cannot be an excuse for sexual assault under the color of legal authority."

O'Rourke said he is calling for an investigation into incident and into Customs and Border Protection search and detention protocols.

"Constitutional limits exist so that the rights of our citizens are protected and the government does not deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law," O'Rourke said. "CBP has a responsibility to ensure that all persons entering into our country are treated humanely and in accordance with our laws."

Advertisement

The lawsuit contends that the 54-year old woman underwent a brutal and inhumane six-hour full-body cavity search by federal officers on Dec. 8, 2012. The suit was filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court and names the El Paso County Hospital District's Board of Managers, University Medical Center, Drs. Michael Parsa and Christopher Cabanillas, two unknown supervising U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers and two other CBP officers only identified by their last names of Portillo and Herrera as defendants.

"(Customs and Border Protection) is acting without accountability right now," said Laura Schauer Ives, legal director of the ACLU in new Mexico, who filed the suit. "They are doing whatever they deem necessary in their pursuit for undocumented immigrations and drugs. This case is a clear example of that. This was not constitutional or necessary to subject someone to this many searches, culminating in a cavity search. This should be a clear indication to every American that we have gone too far."

The lawsuit claims no search warrant was issued. Even after officers were repeatedly unable to find evidence of drugs on the woman, they continued to search her, the lawsuit claims.

"At a port of entry, you have diminished rights," said Jed Untereker, legal director of Paso Del Norte Civil Rights Project. "The federal government has a lot of leeway on what they are able to ask you and what they are able to do to search you. It is not like you are at your house where they need a search warrant. They don't even need probable cause."

According to the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, the diminished rights do not just extend to ports of entry. Federal officials have the right to search anybody without a warrant within 100 air miles of a U.S. border, which encompasses all of El Paso and Las Cruces. That is why border patrol checkpoints on highways are allowed.

"No doubt your rights are different at a port of entry, but that does not mean you have no rights," Ives said. "They are not read their Miranda rights and they are not offered a lawyer."

Activist and politicians are asking for changes to the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations that diminishes the rights of people at ports of entry.

"It is not a constitution-free zone, but you do have diminished rights within a 100 miles of a border," Ives said. "It does not mean you have no rights and this lawsuit is a clear case that the federal government exceeded protections granted under the Fourth Amendment."

U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials declined to comment on the exact policies Wednesday, but sent the El Paso Times a link to a document with their policy when it comes to authority to search.

The CBP policy states "U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officer's border search authority is derived from federal statutes and regulations, including 19 C.F.R. 162.6, which states that, 'All persons, baggage and merchandise arriving in the Customs territory of the United States from places outside thereof are liable to inspection by a CBP officer.'"

The policy given to the El Paso Times does not go into detail on medical examinations for drug searches, but in statement CBP officials said every search is held to the highest standard. Its not known how many full-body searches are conducted every year.

"CBP stresses honor and integrity in every aspect of our mission, and the overwhelming majority of CBP employees and officers perform their duties with honor and distinction, working tirelessly every day to keep our country safe," said Customs and Border Protection officials in a statement. "We do not tolerate corruption or abuse within our ranks, and we fully cooperate with any criminal or administrative investigations of alleged misconduct by any of our personnel, on or off-duty."

Even though officials would not discuss the case, there have been documented cases in which smugglers swallow packets of drugs and later evacuate them from their body or place the drugs in body cavities.

Polices of federal law enforcement agencies have not only come in to question due to this recent lawsuit, but also the role of hospital officials who perform the medical examinations.

In the lawsuit, University Medical Center, where the woman was taken during the search, is also listed as a defendant. UMC officials said they could not discuss the pending lawsuit but said they have launched an investigation.

"Hospital policy is to obtain consent from all patients who receive medical services at UMC," said Margaret Althoff-Olivas, Director of Public Affairs for University Medical Center of El Paso, in a statement. "Because this case involves litigation, UMC will not be commenting further."

Although UMC sent the El Paso Times a copy of its L-13 policy on searching patients, but declined to discuss the policy further.

"We want to assure the community that UMC is conducting a thorough review of the allegations raised in the ACLU's lawsuit," UMC officials said in a statement. "We take these types of claims very seriously and are taking steps to ensure that our staff does the right thing by every patient every day. Hospital policy is to obtain consent from all patients who receive medical services at UMC. "

The L-13 policy states "associates, members of the medical staff, residents or Allied Health Professionals may search a patient only when necessary to comply with a search warrant."

The case in El Paso is not the only one in the region.

In November, a New Mexico man sued Deming police officers who gave him three enemas, two anal probes and a colonoscopy after he was suspected of having drugs. The search found nothing, and lawyers for the man said the warrant used to conduct the search failed to show probable cause.